SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The latest Wikileaks drop is about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, and its probable impact on "State Owned Enterprises." (SOE)
The Analysis of Leaked TPPA Paper for Ministers' Guidance on SOEs, by Professor Jane Kelsey, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland, New Zealand, makes specific reference to public broadcasters as SOEs that could be included under the TPP, and subject to a variety of new, yet undefined, restrictions.
That could mean the CBC in Canada, and likely NPR and PBS in the US. In particular, it's possible that the TPP might insist that governments not provide support (such as funding or protections) for these, and other essential public services.
From the report:
It looks like SOEs are not allowed to get government support or non-commercial assistance – such as capital injections, subsidies, grants, cheaper access to finance, government guarantees and access to land, premises or facilities on preferential terms – if that causes "adverse effects" to another TPPA country. That kind of support is often essential for SOEs that provide public functions that are not proftable or are even loss-making.
{snip} ... it suggests that a postal service, public telecommunications provider or state-owned bank that receives financial support from the government to deliver services into poor areas for social reasons could be challenged by a courier firm, satellite operator or internet bank from another country that says the support is adversely affecting it and hence its country's interests.
(Score: 3, Touché) by hemocyanin on Friday July 31 2015, @06:07PM
Well I am concerned as we move past the nation-state paradigm into a post-national world where political power rests in the hands of the multinational corporate elite. I somehow don't think this minuscule group of people has the best interests of the world population at heart. I'm not saying that nation states have an awesome track record, but I find it inconceivable that Dow Chemical would be a better master.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Friday July 31 2015, @07:11PM
The nation-state as a framework for identity formation has been under assault for a long time now. There are different schools of thought on how the process works. For example you have the Marxists and post-Marxists who believe everything follows from the form of production. Then you have people like Anderson with his focus on mass media and the making of national myths. There are many others, like the post-colonialists and the ethno-linguists--there are a lot. But of those theories I'm familiar with they all point to an imminent epochal shift. Centralized production is under heavy pressure from de-centralization. Centralized mass media is under heavy pressure from the Internet. People are able to do and communicate in so many more ways than they've ever been able to in the history of the world, and each day the gap between what they could do with that and what the entrenched interests in society want to allow them to do with that widens; Eventually, something has to give.
A global corporatocracy is one possible future, but I don't think it will happen. There is no suffrage in it. Who will fight and die to be a citizen of McDonald's? Will you pick up arms to defend GM's right to sell cars? People are far more passionate about the Dallas Cowboys than they are about Prada shoes, but they still don't take to each other with axes after big games.
To me Neal Stephenson's future (to cite popular examples more people might be familiar with) of claves, like those he depicted in Snow Crash and The Diamond Age seems likelier.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by zugedneb on Friday July 31 2015, @07:34PM
I would say, it is exactly what "they" want.
As long as you have a state, you can point fingers; or know your pal/enemy, so to speak.
In a corporatocracy everything will be more difficult. No small player will be able to afford to muck around with anything touching the law.
No small player will *know* enough to point fingers at anyone.
Ownership will be more emphasized in a corporatocracy, challenging it will be even more difficult.
And, if enough people will feel safe and cozy, they will be more than happy in sacrificing others and not ask too many questions.
This will be like a new monarchy, but few will know who the actual king/kings are...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @01:45PM
You won't have a choice because there will be no other way to put food on the table. Capitalism isn't going anywhere, but jobs are continually disappearing. Given the choice between "compromise your ethics" and "starve to death, homeless on the streets with your entire family", most people will choose to compromise their ethics.